Talk:Earth-Romulan War
Destiny's Big Revelation I think that the information on the big reveal in Lost Souls ought to be included. It was a consequence of the Earth-Romulan War, and a pretty important one to boot. Leaving it out would be like leaving out the fact that World War I's end led to the rise of the Nazis and the start of World War II. Further, The Romulan War should be cited for one reason: Its title firmly establishes that an alternate name for the conflict is simply, "the Romulan War." -- Sci 20:59 16 DEC 2008 UTC :It was a consequence, quite a few steps later, of a battle before the war even started, it is no more relevant to note the genesis of the Borg here than it is to detail the ultimate fate of the Columbia, Hernandez, the Caeliar, the super-civilation that was created as a result of the other Caeliar city going further back in time, etc. It just seems very far removed from the Romulan War to bother noting it here. :And a title of a novel is surely not a source? That's not in-universe info, if, when the book is published, it establishes, within the book, that is a name for the conflict, then would be the appropriate time to cite. Putting aside a general policy not to add info from sources that are yet to be released - it could still be cancelled or renamed, tis a long way off. :And as a further thought, surely that wont be the first citation of "the Romulan War", that name has been used widely to reference to the conflict for ages, surely it's turned up somewhere else before? --8of5 22:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC) ::I'm not aware of any other source referring to it specifically as "the Romulan War," actually. I'd be happy to cite the pre-existing source if I'm mistaken, though. (Interestingly, I do believe that Mere Mortals was the first time it was referred to as the "Earth-'Romulus' War" rather than the "Earth-Romulan War.") -- Sci 01:12 17 DEC 2008 UTC I wonder if we'll ever get a reference to it as the Human-Romulan War. Just using the "what links here" feature there are a few pages that link via the "Romulan War" redirect and list it by that name in the references section. The most readily accessible to me was The Worlds of the Federation, which I can confirm does use the term "Romulan War". Though like lots of things in that book it's based on an earlier interpretation of the Trek-verse, so gives the dates of the war as 2106 to 2109. --8of5 19:28, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Coalition of Planets Has the Coalition of Planets actually been confirmed as a side in this yet? And even if it has, is it really necessary to list all the members in the sidebar, surely that detail of that information should wait for the article proper and/or be explained on the page for the Coalition which should detail membership. --8of5 23:52, 26 December 2008 (UTC) :Good point. Edited. -- Sci 23:59 26 DEC 2008 UTC The Romulan Way These were in the novel, and I don't know where these would fit best in this article, so if anyone gets bored...– AT2Howell 22:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC) *According to the Romulans, Starfleet began the Earth-Romulan War when the scanned Romulus. *According to Starfleet, the Earth-Romulan War began three years later when the was destroyed. *The Earth-Romulan War lasted twenty-five years. *The United Federation of Planets was engaged in this war when first contact was made with the Vulcans. (This was later contradicted by .) *Upon the Vulcan entry into the United Federation of Planets, they were asked why Romulan corpses were similar to Vulcans. The Vulcans avoided the question. Start of the War On the page says it starts in 2156 and then states it starts in 2155, which is right. Does this have to do with the new Star Trek Enterprise book about the Romulan War.--TyphussJediVader 19:57, July 11, 2010 (UTC) Clean up This page is a mess the way it is. It is full of information from conflicting sources, many of them rule out each other, but it is forced into a chronology and doesn't make any sense. I recommend we use the events laid out in the new Pocket Enterprise books as a main article and delete the others or move them to the bottom as an "alternate section", or rather multiple sections since there is the FASA, the First 150 Years and a few random thought from other novels. Any input, insight, opinion? - Briet 02:39, September 06, 2014 (UTC) :No no no, the FASA narrative is not an 'alternate' to the novels at all. Just because there are some discontinuities, it doesnt mean the article should be made uninformative by making some sources superior and others inferior. :The people who are adding false claims that certain types of sources are alternate timelines need to stop doing that across the entirety of the wiki. -- Captain MKB 12:51, September 6, 2014 (UTC)